Das Gruppendiskussionsverfahren in Der Forschungspraxis 2010
DOI: 10.2307/j.ctvddzp5w.3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Einleitung:

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Die Datenerhebung erfolgte über das Gruppendiskussionsverfahren (Bohnsack, 2014;Loos, 2001;Przyborski, Schäffer, 2010). Mittels eines zweistufigen Gruppendiskussionsverfahrens (1.…”
Section: Methodischer Zugangunclassified
“…Die Datenerhebung erfolgte über das Gruppendiskussionsverfahren (Bohnsack, 2014;Loos, 2001;Przyborski, Schäffer, 2010). Mittels eines zweistufigen Gruppendiskussionsverfahrens (1.…”
Section: Methodischer Zugangunclassified
“…M1 (first author: FS; PhD; research associate; female) controlled the communication process, provided the questions or prompts. The aim was to encourage the participants to discuss and to generate a creative atmosphere by taking up different ideas and opinions so that the participants can build up narrative ambitions through positive feedbacks [ 22 , 23 ]. M2 (first author: DP; PhD; research associate; male or last author: PJ; PhD; Head of Working Group; male) simultaneously collected thoughts and aspects on an online flip chart ( Miro Board ) for orientation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our case, we showed as a stimulus a clip of the movie “Elling,” where a social worker visits two clients in their flat—and tries to motivate them to overcome their social phobia. The second part is what Bohnsack et al (2010, p. 7) term “group discussion.” It reflects the group dynamic processes and deals with the “possibility of reconstruction of commune orientations.” It aimed to figure out the perspectives and attitudes of the group members and the opinions of the whole group, which could be analyzed by means of interactive characteristics like special and group-related behavior.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%